Can Foreign Polygamists Get Baptised?

[exmormonatheistofutah]

I'm referring to polygamy among some of the muslim, hundu, african polygamists, etc. If the husband wants to be baptised, does he have to divorce all his wives but one? Or, if one of the wives wants to get baptised would she have to divorce herself from her husband?

Also, why is polygamy such a sevier offense if all was concensual? Is it not a surefire excommunicable offense to become polygamist? It strikes me odd that in the 1800s, it was viewed as a very righteous union engaged by the leaders of the church. Once God said that the LDS should nolonger engage in it, why did it then become one of the worst sins worthy of excommunication. Most LDS caught in fornication dont even get excommunicated even. For the vast majority of those LDS that could choose to practice polygamy, their intentions would actually be good, in that they chose a system that might help them be more secure, or what have you, and it might even be acceptable and functional in their cu

lture. I am not argueing that it should be ok in the eyes of god to practice it without his permission. But, why attach it to evilness worthy of excommunication or disfellowshipping?

[volgadon]

Foreign polygamists cannot be baptised whilst stilled married to/living with multiple spouses. It actually is an issue in countries such as France, with a large Muslim population.

[Alan]

Interestingly, they can in the RLDS/Community of Christ.

They even have a section in their D&C dealing with the issue.

[Questing Beast]

This will go away as soon as the SCOTUS overturns the illegal prohibition of polygamy that shut down "the practice" for Mormons. As mentioned, this is already an issue in places where Muslim investigators have multiple wives. As the Church spreads into Africa it will be come as big, or bigger, an issue as mixed races was in S. America, where new temples were being erected in areas where predominantly Negro blood populations were joining the Church; the 1978 priesthood revelation came. So too will allowing polygamists from other nations, first, quietly I presume, then applying in the USA as well....

Edited July 23, 2013 by Questing Beast

[webbles]

I think the reason why it is an excommunicable offense is because of the history around stopping it. Even after the Second Manifesto, people still wanted to have polygamous unions. A few leaders went around and "sealed" those together. Even after excommunicating those leaders, that didn't stop the unions because the leaders would say they weren't excommunicated or that they were secretly allowed to continue. If the new polygamous family is also excommunicated, it makes a stronger statement about the fact of ending polygamy. In some communities, they actually went farther than just excommunicating. They would shun the family. I have a great-great (?) uncle who took a second wife in the 1920s. He and both of his wives were excommunicated. They were not allowed to attend town dances (which in reality were church dances), people crossed the streets to avoid them, friendships were cut off. The local ward/stake was using them as an example to prevent others from starting polygamy.

[Bikeemikey]

This will go away as soon as the SCOTUS overturns the illegal prohibition of polygamy that shut down "the practice" for Mormons. As mentioned, this is already an issue in places where Muslim investigators have multiple wives. As the Church spreads into Africa it will be come as big, or bigger, an issue as mixed races was in S. America, where new temples were being erected in areas where predominantly Negro blood populations were joining the Church; the 1978 priesthood revelation came. So too will allowing polygamists from other nations, first, quietly I presume, then applying in the USA as well....

Polygamy was a practice of multiple wives consecrated through the priesthood. It was not just the practice of multiple wives. Those with out the priesthood with multiple wives are not practicing polygamy as it was practiced in the early church...

That said... watch this space... im sure it will become a bigger issue in the future.

[strappinglad]

If a Muslim converts , he has a bigger problem in some areas than polygamy.

[thesometimesaint]

I don't expect that there will be any change to the LDS non-practice of polygamy even if the USSC rules that polygamy is now legal. Though it might have a big effect on the FLDS.

[Freedom]

A polygamist must give up the extra wives and a fornicator must take a wife (or husband as the case may be).

[Calm]

A polygamist must give up the extra wives and a fornicator must take a wife (or husband as the case may be).

However, the Church as a policy does not encourage polygynists where it is legal to put aside their wives in order to be baptized, they tell them to take care of their wives and children first....or so I was told by someone I trust to know.

In most countries where polygyny is legal, divorce would leave a family destitute and without respectability....and a man who has married more than one wife and had children by them is responsible for their well being and must put aside his own needs for theirs for a time at least, even if that means putting off baptism.

Edited July 23, 2013 by calmoriah

[halconero]

However, the Church as a policy does not encourage polygynists where it is legal to put aside their wives in order to be baptized, they tell them to take care of their wives and children first....or so I was told by someone I trust to know.

In most countries where polygyny is legal, divorce would leave a family destitute and without respectability....and a man who has married more than one wife and had children by them is responsible for their well being and must put aside his own needs for theirs for a time at least, even if that means putting off baptism.

The same is true for couples living together outside of wedlock, with children.

For those just living together it is not uncommon for missionaries teaching them inviting them to live apart as an alternative to marriage.

For those with kids they are counselled to focus on marriage, and are discouraged from encouraging the couple to split apart. We had this situation in Phoenix where a Mexican couple didn't have any ID to get a marriage licence, had already had kids, and were told to come to church, but they could not be baptized at that time (later on a miracle happened, but that's another story).

People often say that the Church is focused on numbers above all else, but I think this is one piece of very good evidence against that. Keeping a family together > more baptisms.

[Bikeemikey]

The same is true for couples living together outside of wedlock, with children.

For those just living together it is not uncommon for missionaries teaching them inviting them to live apart as an alternative to marriage.

For those with kids they are counselled to focus on marriage, and are discouraged from encouraging the couple to split apart. We had this situation in Phoenix where a Mexican couple didn't have any ID to get a marriage licence, had already had kids, and were told to come to church, but they could not be baptized at that time (later on a miracle happened, but that's another story).

People often say that the Church is focused on numbers above all else, but I think this is one piece of very good evidence against that. Keeping a family together > more baptisms.

We probably need to revise the law of chastity to read legally and lawfully married in a manner like unto marriage law in the USA.

I'm looking forward to the day when chastity is measured against the temple sealing and the temple sealing does not require a civil marriage.

Just take those Mexicans in your story to the temple and seal them - problem solved.

[Brian 2.0]

We probably need to revise the law of chastity to read legally and lawfully married in a manner like unto marriage law in the USA.

I'm looking forward to the day when chastity is measured against the temple sealing and the temple sealing does not require a civil marriage.

Just take those Mexicans in your story to the temple and seal them - problem solved.

I agree with this mostly, but it does cause a problem in that one cannot get sealed unless they are can get a temple recommend. So a couple who wanted to be together might not have the ability because one is still struggling with the WoW or something. So in keeping the law of chastity under this system they couldn't have sex until he quit smoking and got a temple recommend.

[Bikeemikey]

I agree with this mostly, but it does cause a problem in that one cannot get sealed unless they are can get a temple recommend. So a couple who wanted to be together might not have the ability because one is still struggling with the WoW or something. So in keeping the law of chastity under this system they couldn't have sex until he quit smoking and got a temple recommend.

Surely a willingness to marry in the temple is more evidence of a couples serious commitment than a piece of paper issued by the govt.

Just have the bishops issue a preparatory sealing certificate (or some such thing) that shows they are working towards sealing and the church considers them as good as married.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Bikeemikey

[EllenMaksoud]

This will go away as soon as the SCOTUS overturns the illegal prohibition of polygamy that shut down "the practice" for Mormons. As mentioned, this is already an issue in places where Muslim investigators have multiple wives. As the Church spreads into Africa it will be come as big, or bigger, an issue as mixed races was in S. America, where new temples were being erected in areas where predominantly Negro blood populations were joining the Church; the 1978 priesthood revelation came. So too will allowing polygamists from other nations, first, quietly I presume, then applying in the USA as well....

Oh, I see the truth now! The idea of polygamy is not dead and in a segment of American culture, it is not objectionable. Take a close look at those who object to it. Take a close look at the cases and who brought them, and their beliefs and political alignments. It probably all comes from a small segment of Americans. And the reason that it surfaces here so much is to educate others about the practice.

Just look out on the street in ages up to about 40, you see it occurring. They don't run down the street parading who they are. They aren't secretive. They just don't speak about it to those not in their circles, it is private. I don't thnk that religious conviction drives it though. Just look around you. So many young Americans, even college graduates are making minimum wage, so economic necessity draws people together in odd alliances.

It is all so clear now, why didn't I see it before, it is so obvious. We see these things through the lense of certain mores, but fail to see we have raised a generation or two of children with no mores. Government has gotten so big that a long time member of the church told me today that she thinks this big government is going to lead to a reckoning.

[rpn]

You do realize that people got married long before governments started telling them how to do it. In more modern times it was called common law marriage, and until fairly recently maybe (30 or so years)such marriages were as accepted for church purposes as they were under the laws of states.

[Freedom]

However, the Church as a policy does not encourage polygynists where it is legal to put aside their wives in order to be baptized, they tell them to take care of their wives and children first....or so I was told by someone I trust to know.

In most countries where polygyny is legal, divorce would leave a family destitute and without respectability....and a man who has married more than one wife and had children by them is responsible for their well being and must put aside his own needs for theirs for a time at least, even if that means putting off baptism.

Nevertheless, they are not allowed to be baptized so long as they have more than one wife.